P. v. Sanchez
Filed 8/23/12 P. v. Sanchez CA2/3
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts
and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or
ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115
IN
THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND
APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION
THREE
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
Daniel Sanchez,
Defendant and Appellant.
B238537
(Los Angeles
County
Super. Ct.
No. KA083606)
APPEAL
from a judgment of the Superior Court
of
County, Wade Olson, Judge.
Affirmed.
California
Appellate Project and Richard B. Lennon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for
Defendant and Appellant.
No
appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Defendant
and appellant Daniel Sanchez appeals from the judgment entered following his
plea of no contest to one count of second
degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211)
during the commission of which he personally used a firearm (§ 12022.5,
subd. (a)). The trial court
sentenced Sanchez to 12 years in prison and awarded him a total of 249 days of
presentence custody credit. We affirm.
On
July 23, 2008, an
information was filed in case No. KA083606 in which Sanchez was charged with
one count of second degree robbery (§ 211) and one count of willfully evading
an officer while operating a motor vehicle (Veh. Code, § 2800.2,
subd. (a)). It was further alleged
as to counts 1 and 2 that, during the offenses, Sanchez personally used a
firearm, a handgun, within the meaning of section 12022.53, subdivision (b),
which caused the robbery and evading charges to become serious felonies
pursuant to section 1192.7, subdivision (c)(8) and violent felonies within the
meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (c)(8).
In addition, it was alleged as to counts 1 and 2 that Sanchez had been
convicted of five felonies between 2001 and 2006, which prohibited a grant of
probation within the meaning of section 1203, subdivision (e)(4), and that
he had suffered five prior convictions for which he served prison terms within
the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b).
On
February 6, 2009, Sanchez
entered into a plea bargain under the
terms of which he would plead guilty or no contest to second degree robbery,
during which he used a firearm. In
exchange, he would be sentenced to 12 years in prison. On the plea form, Sanchez indicated that he
understood that the court would order him to pay restitution, fees and other
assessments, and that he would receive presentence custody credit for 217 days
actually served and 32 days of good time/work time, for a total of 249 days.
After
waiving his right to a jury trial, his
right to a court trial, his right to confront and cross-examine witnesses, his
right against self-incrimination and his right to produce evidence and to put
on a defense, including his right to testify on his own behalf, Sanchez “freely
and voluntarily†pled no contest to second degree robbery and admitted having
used a gun during the offense.
The
trial court found that there was a factual basis for the plea, accepted it,
then imposed sentence pursuant to the plea
agreement. For his conviction of
second degree robbery as alleged in count 1, the trial court sentenced Sanchez
to two years in state prison. For
Sanchez’s use of a gun during the offense, the court imposed a term of
10 years, for a total sentence of 12 years in state prison. The trial court then dismissed all remaining
counts and allegations.
On
December 23, 2011,
Sanchez, acting in propria persona, filed in the trial court a “Motion to
Correct [the] Abstract of Judgment.â€
Sanchez asserted that the 249 days of presentence custody credit awarded
“failed to include all the in-custody [c]redits from the non-controlling cases,
and previous incarcerations in [its] sentencing calcu[la]tions. [¶]
[Sanchez indicated] that he is entitled to credit in the amount of over
1000 days of actual custody and over 200 days of [good time/work time] for a total
of over 1200 days of pre-sentence in-custody credits.â€
Sanchez
requested the trial court to order its clerk to “create an amended Abstract of
Judgment to reflect the proper credits to the sentence . . . for a total of
over 1200 days, and submit the amended Abstract . . . to the Department of
Corrections [which should] . . . immediately apply the credits.â€
At
proceedings held on December 23, 2011,
the trial court denied Sanchez’s motion.
The trial court found “that the defendant ha[d] been given the proper
custody credits.â€
On
January 17, 2012, Sanchez
filed a notice of appeal and requested the appointment of counsel. This court appointed
After
examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief which raised no
issues and requested this court to conduct an independent review of the
record. By notice filed May 30, 2012, the clerk of this court
advised Sanchez to submit within 30 days any contentions, grounds of appeal or
arguments he wished this court to consider.
Sanchez
submitted a brief in which he again contended he is entitled to over
1,200 days of presentence custody credit.
The contention, however, is without merit. Section 2900.5, subdivision (b)
provides: “For the purpose of this
section, credit shall be given only where the custody to be credited is
attributable to proceedings related to the same conduct for which the defendant
has been convicted.†Here, sentence was
imposed for the robbery with a firearm alleged in case No. KA083606 and
Sanchez is entitled to presentence custody credit attributable to that matter
only. The trial court properly awarded
him credit for 249 days.
We
have examined the entire record and are satisfied counsel has complied fully
with counsel’s responsibilities. (
443.)
The
judgment is affirmed.
CROSKEY,
J.
We concur:
KLEIN,
P. J.
ALDRICH,
J.
name="_ftn1" title="">
further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
